The price of living in a free society is that occasionally someone is going to get pissed off at the world and blow up spectators at a marathon or take a gun to a classroom of kiddies. It would be great if we could stop this, but if the only way of stopping it is to take away your freedom and allow the government to spy on its people then maybe the price is too high.

Assuming that such things would actually be effective in the first place. Even if they were that they wouldn't put the public at greater risk from rogue "law enforcement".

Terrorists aim to inspire terror. That's what they do.

This is something often missed. A bomb threat can be a very effective terror tactic. Even for a terrorist group without the ability to actually build a working bomb.
Causing such sensors to falsely trigger would be a variation on the theme of "SWATting".

I was thinking very much this. You don't even need to use a septic tank: all you need is that it never reaches the sewer system. Just get it into some kind of barrel or tank, bury it if you so desire (at your house or somewhere else) and continue as planned.

Or more usefully someone else's house. If the intention is for a car/truck bomb any waste products can probably go in the vehicle too.

First they'll put a probe in each neighborhood. Then they'll put a probe in the sewer for each street. Then they'll put a probe in the individual drains from every house. Then when they detect cocaine, you'll get a ticket in the mail.

What's to stop someone else pouring something nasty down YOUR drain though?

Do it yourself means that you manage risk and cost. Handing it over to an outside contractor means, inevitably, eventually, with all companies, some douche nozzle accountant executive with limited tech knowledge in the pursuit personal bonuses and claiming great savings and extra profit with the typical B$ spreadsheet. Will take a series of cost savings short cuts that allow risk of data loss to become a certainty of data loss.

However you don't know when this is happening. So cannot assess and manage you risk. It' s possible you may not even find out even after a loss/disclosure has occured.
Note also that if the company you choose is bigger than you are then you automatically increase your risk. Since crackers, both criminal and government sponsored, tend to be interested in the biggest targets. Whilst momandpop.com might have to specifically attract the attention of the "bad guys" they are already looking at Dropbox, Amazon, Google, Skydrive, etc.

How will you ever know for sure that the program won't send your private key to the server - encrypted with another key so you will never see it if you would try to monitor traffic?

Unless you control the "client side" software you can't even know if it is even using the key you think it is. Never mind doing something as elaborate as steganography to send data you don't know it's sending.

Indeed. Mostly give up the idea of having the host encrypt files for you. You never know if they have a backdoor of some sort.

Even "pre-Snowden" relying on a remote service or software provided by that service to perform such "encryption" was a bad idea. Even without deliberate "backdoors" there are many ways in which such a system can can fail, especially if proprietary software in involved.

Not only is it untrue, but solar/wind will be much cheaper than coal in just a few years. The technology is really moving that fast.

The biggest problem with both solar and wind is that output is effectivly random. Without either alternative power sources or the ability to store huge amounts of energy it's just not possible to match supply to demand.

I recall when Windows 95 was out, Microsoft got into trouble with the Indian government for showing a part of Kashmir within Pakistan. I forget in which version they dropped the maps and made it simply a list of the major cities in each time zone.
I'd like to see someone produce a map that shows Tibet as a separate country, label China as 'Greater Taiwan' or better still, as 'Taiwanese Beijing' (as a spoof on the IOC's label of Taiwan as 'Chinese Taipei').

In the case of a timezone map the more obvious thing would be label the Hawaiian islands as "Occupied by the USA".

The problem is with schools (at least around here) is that what they teach as "IT" and "computer literacy" is in fact nothing of the sort - they are just teaching office skills, not really any different to how my mother was taught to touch type and to use shorthand.

The modern version is possibly more limited. Since the older version wasn't restricted to using one model of typewriter...

After a while they start to think that the various bad interface designs are a conspiracy against them; this is only compounded when a technical type reaches over and helps them with a flick of a single switch, and when asked why couldn't it have been designed better it becomes obvious that the technical person is hunting for a way to not say, "They assumed that you had at least a double digit IQ." and then it becomes hatred.

Assuming that the "technical type" isn't silently cursing the user interface... Also what type of person usually designs user interfaces?

The research suggests that the genetic predisposition causes the immune system to act different in response to the virus. If the research is correct, then yes you need both the genetic factor and the virus to get type-1 diabetes.

All diabetes appears to be GbyE. The interaction between both Genetic and Enviromental factors. It's supected that the genetic factors involved with T1 are more general (could be involved with many "auto immue" conditions) than those involved with T2.

Fructose is associated with fatty liver disease, fructose is a monosaccaride that the liver must convert into glucose before it can be utilized, sucrose (table sugar) is a disaccaride composed of fructose and glucose.

The liver converts excess sugars into FATS. The reason it does this is because sugars disolve in blood plasma (water) thus their concentration within the blood must be closely regulated. Where as fats, within VLDL, can circulate in the blood at various concentrations without causing any problems. The association with fatty liver disase would be that the liver is producing fat faster than either VLDL (or cholesterol). (So maybe it's more fructose/galactose without protein.) Converting fructose to glucose would serve no useful purpose in a mammal. (Even glucose to galactose dosn't appear to be a major part of lactation.) Fats are of rather more use, since they can be used "structurally" as well as for "fuel".

You might also mention that Fructose (while it taste Sweet) is the Stealth molecule.. they body "can't detect".. you can eat a ton of Fructose.. or sugars like Table Sugar, Date Sugar, Maltitol, Sorbitol or 90% Fructose Agave Syrup.. and not raise your Insulin levels one Iota.. the Body it quite literally "Blind" to Fructose.

Manitol and sorbitol are "sugar alcohols" a different type of ogranic compound. "Table Sugar" is sucrose, a disaccharide of fructose and glucose. Fruits tend to contain a mixture of glucose, fructose and sucrose. As plant based foods the will also contain galactan, a galcatose polysaccharide. Some, such as bananas, also contain high levels of the glucose polysaccharides amylose and amylopectin.

The body can't burn Fructose, it has to turn it Into human Fat, then store that Fat, then Break that same Fat down into Glucose before it can burn it to fuel..

Human cells are prefectly able to "burn" frutose (or galactose for that matter). These get turned into fat by the liver since fats are of considerably more use than sugars to mammals. Any glucose which cannot be used in fairly short order is also converted to fats (assuming insulin is available.) The only cells which can't "burn" fats are those without mitochondria there's thus no need for anything other than a fairly low level of GNG even with a zero glucose diet.

you've already filled your Fat cells with the Jellied Fructose Fat.

Fats produced by the liver enter the blood inside VLDL, which are likely to remain in the bloodstream considerably longer than any dietary glucose.

Quite literally makes any Glucose that would have been harmless before.. Toxic and in Life threatening instantly.. congratulations.. you have Type 2 diabetes.

An excess of glucose in the blood is dangerous in itself. This would also be the case with fructose and galactose. But the regulatory mechanism is different here. T2 diabetes occurs when it cannot be removed quickly enough from the blood to keep it below toxic levels (7.6 mmol/l). Doing this is going to be easier with every cell taking up glucose than if only the liver and fat cells are doing so...

I thought Fructose was the prime candidate for over production of Fatty Acids and Triglycerides that literally "jam up" the mechanism that normally brings high blood sugar down. And that Insulin "resistance" was simply a conservation of mass problem.. literally.. all available Fat cell space is used up.. until the body can make more.. like a Housing Shortage

The human (or any other mammal) body dosn't work that way. Some cells need insulin before they can take up glucose. But more or less all cells can take up fructose and galactose without needing it to be present. What typically happens in practice is virtually all dietary fructose and galactose is changed into fats by the liver. It's impossible to fat cells to become "full up" since they can always undergo mitosis.

So the Blood Sugar and Fat Triglycerides just sit in the blood stream congealing and eroding the outside of the cells in the arteries and veins and organs exposed to the soup.

Sugars disolve in blood plasma, thus must be cosely regulated to maintain the required physical and chemical properties. Lipids are carried in cell like structures called lipoproteins. The number of lipoproteins in the blood, especially chylomicrons and VLDL can vary greatly.
Usually cells would taking glucose from the blood once the concentration in the cytoplasm exceeds a certain level. (Regardless of how much insulin is present in the blood.) Insulin resistance is the case insulin receptors remaining "off" even after cytoplasm glucose levels fall e.g. due to glycolysis. High levels on insulin and/or glucose tend to inhibit formation of lipoprotein receptors so an insulin resistant cell can't easily switch its ATP production from glycolysis and TCA cycle to beta oxidation or ketosis. Since liver and fat cells have the additional metabolic pathway of converting glucose to fat they don't tend to become insulin resistant.